I think it's a balance of graphics and gameplay. If you have wonderful gameplay and lousy graphics, it's not very believable. If you have wonderful graphics and lousy gameplay, it's not very believable. In my opinion, once we got to patch 1.4 in SH111, the game became very enjoyable. Others will have the opinion that there were so many things that never got fixed in SH111 that they could not enjoy the game. But I don't know anybody who was so unhappy with the graphics in SH111 that they couldn't immerse themselves in the game. Other than wave texture and transparency discussions, the consensus was that the graphics in SH111 were pretty good. Relative to SH1V, I'm not expecting a major bump in graphics quality....I am hoping that the gameplay is in better shape than SH111 was at the time of its release.

The "good feeling" of new graphics only lasts so long. Gameplay/Realism, on the other hand, can make or break a good sim...and make you come back and back again.

and just think about how much more time could be focused on new features vise fixing things that havent been fixed a la SH3. Just think if they just could have had a little more time to test and fix SH3. Waiting for more news......

Yeah. I really don't see it as a battle of the graphics guys versus the gameplay guys. Both elements are integral to the enjoyment of the game. I just want SH1V to be a great subsim that corrects the gameplay errors of SH111 and improves the crew management element of the game. If they want to bump up the graphics....fine, but to me the SH111 graphics were fine. I'd rather not have to add more RAM to my system in order to run SH1V.

[QUOTE=TDK1044][quote=Immacolata]I think people are reading too much into this graphics overhaul they are doing in SHIV. They need to create all new ships and subs. Now they are at it, why stop with last years standards? They up the polys, increase the texture res, redo the particles system and perhaps add a few shaderwhatchacallums on the ocean surface. Done deal.

I am positive that the extra eye candy we get is minor compared to the bread and butter work they have to do anyways. You perhaps import basic ship meshes from SH3, but Id bet the graphics designer would rather be found dead than seen reusing SH3s textures and models. At the very least they will make sure to use higher res everything so the game will look more detailed.

Oh, and for graphics - there was a few niggles I had. Forced resolution and the 8000 m visibility range was major problems I had with SH3. The latter part was really nasty IMO, and I am worrying they haven't fixed this for SH4. Unbelievably the interviewer didn't ask about it >.<

Realism is overrated. I might want to make that my sig. Some people have almost a fetishistic view of Realism (lightning strike and thunder, horses whinnying in panic somewhere outside the viewframe). I'd like mine served rather realistic but also pretty and at the very least enjoyable. Sometimes the much lauded Realism (thunder and another bout of whinnying of horses) gets in the way of actually playing the game. I remember for a while that I didn't even bother playing SH3 because I found out about this 8000m range. I suddenly realized that this was a decision made by the devs for some reason. And they had padded this deficit up with giving the player an artificially inflated amount of radio contacts, to compensate for the ridiculously low visibilty.
After I discovered this severe lack in the Realism (thunder and lighting strikes another time and send the horses whinnying yet again) department, I didn't bother playing SH3 for quite a while. NYGM "saved" me after half a year. And I realized that this Realism (thunder and whinnying) obsession had robbed me of a good bit of enjoyment. I could still have played SH3 and had fun, but nooo. I nurtured hurt feelings and a swollen Realism (thunder, whinny) gland instead.

Points well made, Immacolata.:up:

Thanks, oh and I forgot Finchou: no, the good feeling is a major reason to why I still bother leaving port for another patrol in my VIIC, today 1½ years after SH3 was released. I really, REALLY enjoy the silent moments on the conning tower, just cruising across the waves as the rising sun climbs above the horizon. At some point, yes I tend to ignore this "graphics" but perhaps it is because they are rather good and makes me forget about them being graphics. Actually, I am reminded every time I gawp at a ship through my periscope and notice the jaggies created on the ships wires running from masts. It is there because the low resolution makes it impossible to draw the line unbroken, even with 6x AA turned on.

But no, good graphics means high aesthetics. And you never grow tired of a good painting ^_^

I never really understood why people constantly need to point this out.

"Too much spoils the experience"? That goes for all things. Too good graphics might get in the way of playing the game. Too much simplicity could get in the way of playing the game. And so on and so forth.

Isn't that your problem more than the game's?

Yup. In the beginning, sure it's great to have 3D compartments, a cheering crowd at dock (complete with marching band), and what the Heck not. But today, I spend ,5% of my in-game time in the 3D compartments, I've grown tired of waving at my fans in port, and the sea-gulls are "just there".

Sure, graphics are awesome, but, it's game-play that's the experience.

Well it is a game problem if you think Realism. 8000m visibility from a conning tower about a dozen feet above the surface and in bright clear sun shine? Isn't that a bit of a problem for a game that supposedly simulations a u-boot skipper and his crew doing submarine warfare on the Atlantic? The lookouts could see smoke columns 20-30 km out from the conning tower in good weather.

Yes, you make your point very well, Immacolata. Now let me tell you why you're wrong... oh wait, I agee with most of it :yep:

If you don't, I will :)

Agree completely, especially how it can prevent one from enjoying a game if allowed to.

The realism issue is an interesting one. To many, realism is vital. To me, a realistic feel to the game is important, but so is the enjoyment level of playing the game and that sometimes conflicts with realism.

As an example, if you take the actual realism game settings; I find playing SH111 at the 100 percent realism setting very challenging but less enjoyable than allowing myself a few cheats and playing at about 70 percent. So I choose enjoyment over absolute reality. And for those that say that realism is everything; then the sim should show us badly burnt, injured and dead people floating in the water as you pass on the surface a ship that you sunk at close range.

As Immacolata stated very well, "realism is overrated".

I agree with a lot of nvdrifter's list of complaints, and there are others as well. I won't mention them, because I'm in an 'on the other hand' sort of mood today. One of the major complaints is the 'instant death' screen, but for realism's sake it should be mentioned that when you die you probably don't get to see your boat sink into the depths, and I'm certain you can't read your own obituary in the hometown newspaper. Those are features I would like to see, but I'm just arguing for realism's sake.

Likewise, if we are criticizing UBI for blowing it on realism, one of our loudest complaints should be about all the time, energy and memory wasted on those stupid external views. How much better the game would have been if they had devoted themselves to a realistic interaction between you and the people you deal with. Wouldn't it have been better to have a cut scene of Onkel Karl himself pinning your Iron Cross on your chest, or your sailors stepping off the boat and having their girlfriends leap into their arms. These are things you could really see in real life.

No, don't take me seriously; I'm just being contrary.

I would have loved to have seen the crew on the deck of the boat prior to leaving base so you could have given them a up and at them type of speach to get them in the mood for the patrol. also when you return from base it would have been great to have your pennants flying showing how much tonnage you had sunk.
A more relastic build patrols in the baltic prior to leaving on your first war patrol would have been great.

It all boils down to preferences
No one is forced to use a particular mod that makes things harder or graphically better
Your choice

I will say this though
The out of the box game was a great idea and step forward
The reality is the stock game was a half arsed half finished release
If I hadnt stumbled across this site my SH3 would have been back in the box on a shelf long before now

Big sales may help Ubi short term but if a couple of months after playing it its back in the box cos it didnt grab\hold your attention then your not going to rush out and buy the next Ubi release are you

Well I am not anyway

I agree with Nvdrifter, games these days rely more and more on eye candy..games companys dont give a hoot these days..money money money...thats why we get patch after patch to fix things..look at BF2 they release a patch to stop people unlocking weapons, screwed up the game so they release a patch to fix a patch
Games back in the 80's early 90's had better gameplay due to having not so good graphics, Thats all they had to sell the game, the game HAD to have good gameplay ( replay value ) due to having shocking graphics ( by todays standards ), these days they hope you get blown away by the graphics.